[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CANn89iK5UMzkVaw2ed_WrOFZ4c=kSpGkKens2B-_cLhqk41yCg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2024 14:53:57 +0200
From: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
To: "gregkh@...uxfoundation.org" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc: Siddh Raman Pant <siddh.raman.pant@...cle.com>,
"stable@...r.kernel.org" <stable@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: CVE-2024-41041: udp: Set SOCK_RCU_FREE earlier in udp_lib_get_port().
On Tue, Sep 3, 2024 at 2:07 PM gregkh@...uxfoundation.org
<gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Sep 03, 2024 at 11:56:17AM +0000, Siddh Raman Pant wrote:
> > On Mon, 29 Jul 2024 16:32:36 +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > > In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
> > >
> > > udp: Set SOCK_RCU_FREE earlier in udp_lib_get_port().
> > >
> > > [...]
> > >
> > > We had the same bug in TCP and fixed it in commit 871019b22d1b ("net:
> > > set SOCK_RCU_FREE before inserting socket into hashtable").
> > >
> > > Let's apply the same fix for UDP.
> > >
> > > [...]
> > >
> > > The Linux kernel CVE team has assigned CVE-2024-41041 to this issue.
> > >
> > >
> > > Affected and fixed versions
> > > ===========================
> > >
> > > Issue introduced in 4.20 with commit 6acc9b432e67 and fixed in 5.4.280 with commit 7a67c4e47626
> > > Issue introduced in 4.20 with commit 6acc9b432e67 and fixed in 5.10.222 with commit 9f965684c57c
> >
> > These versions don't have the TCP fix backported. Please do so.
>
> What fix backported exactly to where? Please be more specific. Better
> yet, please provide working, and tested, backports.
commit 871019b22d1bcc9fab2d1feba1b9a564acbb6e99
Author: Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@...ichev.me>
Date: Wed Nov 8 13:13:25 2023 -0800
net: set SOCK_RCU_FREE before inserting socket into hashtable
...
Fixes: 6acc9b432e67 ("bpf: Add helper to retrieve socket in BPF")
It seems 871019b22d1bcc9fab2d1feba1b9a564acbb6e99 has not been pushed
to 5.10 or 5.4 lts
Stanislav mentioned a WARN_ONCE() being hit, I presume we could push
the patch to 5.10 and 5.4.
I guess this was skipped because of a merge conflict.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists